The view from Sir Nicolas Bratza's vast, curving windows takes in the skyline of Strasbourg, the European parliament building and, far below, the river Ill flooding east to join the Rhine.

Along the riverbank, at the judicial heart of the continent, there is a scattering of single-person tents – temporary homes for desperate petitioners to the European court of human rights (ECHR). A protest by Turks and Kurds parades outside the court's entrance to denounce Turkey for promoting an alleged torturer to a senior security post in Istanbul, thereby flouting ECHR rulings.

For more than 800 million people, the steel and glass building designed by the British architect Richard Rogers is the ultimate focus of their aspiration for justice. After 14 years as the UK's sole judge and a year as president of the court, Bratza is stepping down at the end of this month. His departure is tinged with disappointment.

The ECHR's judicial powers extend across 47 member states, stretching from the Caspian Sea to the Straits of Gibraltar and as far north as Iceland. As a signatory to the original European convention of human rights, which was drafted to prevent the recurrence of another Holocaust and safeguard individuals from totalitarian misrule, the UK was a founder of the project.

Stirred up by tabloid denunciations and Eurosceptic politicians, British popular sentiment has become increasingly critical of the court. The UK remains one of the most diligent enforcers of convention rights, but it appears to have soured into one of the least appreciative national constituencies.

For some, disenchantment began with the 1995 judgment that the UK had violated the right to life of three IRA members shot dead by the SAS in Gibraltar. It has escalated over the standoff on prisoners' voting rights and rows over the protracted legal processes for extraditing terror suspects such as Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada.

Bratza, 67, was a successful advocate and a crown court recorder before being elected in 1998 as the UK's judge on the ECHR. He is also a high court judge. He became president of the ECHR in 2011.

"The UK complies very well," he said. "Where we find a violation, they correct it. I remain personally hopeful that some solution to this problem [of prisoners' voting rights] that will satisfy the UK parliament and the [ECHR] will be found."

Italy is one of the worst serial offenders in violating the convention, because of the inordinately long periods it takes to complete trials.

On the ECHR's backlog of 138,000 cases, he said: "The problem is processing them. The court's registry is very hard-working. We have cases coming in from [more than] 40 legal systems. We have to have people from [each] legal system who understand the language."

Of around 650 staff, 44 are from the UK. Case notes are colour-coded by the year they arrive. Lime green (2012), orange (2011) and yellow (2009) files were visible, piled up on desks and floors in offices along one corridor.

Appealing to member states for extra funds to tackle the backlog has not generated much income. "The UK has not contributed," Bratza said. "The results have been disappointing. Certain newspapers said we were putting out a begging bowl. It's not that. It was to assist the court."

This year the UK completed its six-month, rotating chairmanship of the Council of Europe, the body that oversees the ECHR. It culminated in the Brighton declaration, a reform programme that refined the concepts of "subsidiarity" and the "margin of appreciation" – the leeway given to nation states in their interpretation of convention rights.

The ECHR, Bratza ssaid, should be subsidiary to national courts. "In order for us to accept our subsidiary role, [member states] have to be the primary protectors of convention rights. The problem is that it's a two-sided coin. National states must carry out their functions.

"The UK has an admirable record on compliance and enforcement [of convention rights]. Provided states do their job, our job becomes much easier. We are a safety net."

The reforms enshrined in the Brighton declaration were steered through by Ken Clarke before he was removed from his job as justice secretary in the recent reshuffle. Does Chris Grayling's appointment mark a sharp handbrake turn?

"I like the UK to play a whole-hearted role in matters European," Bratza said. "I was pleased to hear [the attorney general] Dominic Grieve say in parliament this week that there was no question of leaving the ECHR. The UK leaving would be very damaging."

The economic crisis may not help relations between London and Strasbourg, he said. "Where there's a more general economic problem, it inevitably has an impact on protecting human rights. There's risk that human rights become [seen as] a sort of luxury, that we don't need to bother so much, [that] … we should be more resistant to immigration or other matters which might be a further burden on the economy. There's a risk always with an economic crisis that a society closes in on itself and becomes less open to the idea of human rights. Human rights are not a luxury, they should be fundamental.

"I met Mr Grayling at the chancellor's breakfast this year and urged him to come to Strasbourg to speak to the president of the court. Unfortunately it won't be within my time in office. I think an early discussion would be valuable to him and the court."

Bratza's greatest frustration is with sections of the British press. "Whatever we do, some adverse spin is put on news coming out of the court. It's very depressing to see. When I was first elected as president of the ECHR, I would have thought there might be some pleasure on the part of British newspapers. For too long it had been said that ECHR judges didn't know British law.

"But papers focused on the fact that my father was born in Serbia, giving the impression that he was a balalaika player from the streets of Belgrade." His father, Milan Bratza, was a distinguished concert violinist.

"They ignored the fact that he was naturalised in 1928 and that I was born and educated in the UK. On my mother's side, there are generations of law lords.

"We feel some of the language used to criticise the court is beyond the pale."

Asked about his achievements, he listed the ECHR's successes. "The court has had enormous achievements under every article of the convention: the importance of an effective investigation where there's been a killing, our opposition to the death penalty is a huge feather in the court's cap, protecting private sexual relations, the development of environmental rights, protection of private life from intrusion of the press, protection of press freedom, stopping journalists from being imprisoned for libel … It is a long list."

Would he apply for one of the three vacancies for justices advertised this week by the UK's supreme court? "I have been out of the UK as a judge for 14 years," he said. "So the idea of going back where I would have a maximum of two and a half years [on the bench before retirement] to pick up the threads in the UK … would not really be advisable. I have made my judicial career here and that's probably where it will end. I have adored it. It's been a wonderful job."